↓ Skip to main content

Navigating through digital folders uses the same brain structures as real world navigation

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
45 tweeters
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
48 Mendeley
Title
Navigating through digital folders uses the same brain structures as real world navigation
Published in
Scientific Reports, October 2015
DOI 10.1038/srep14719
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yael Benn, Ofer Bergman, Liv Glazer, Paris Arent, Iain D. Wilkinson, Rosemary Varley, Steve Whittaker

Abstract

Efficient storage and retrieval of digital data is the focus of much commercial and academic attention. With personal computers, there are two main ways to retrieve files: hierarchical navigation and query-based search. In navigation, users move down their virtual folder hierarchy until they reach the folder in which the target item is stored. When searching, users first generate a query specifying some property of the target file (e.g., a word it contains), and then select the relevant file when the search engine returns a set of results. Despite advances in search technology, users prefer retrieving files using virtual folder navigation, rather than the more flexible query-based search. Using fMRI we provide an explanation for this phenomenon by demonstrating that folder navigation results in activation of the posterior limbic (including the retrosplenial cortex) and parahippocampal regions similar to that previously observed during real-world navigation in both animals and humans. In contrast, search activates the left inferior frontal gyrus, commonly observed in linguistic processing. We suggest that the preference for navigation may be due to the triggering of automatic object finding routines and lower dependence on linguistic processing. We conclude with suggestions for future computer systems design.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 45 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 48 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 47 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 19%
Researcher 5 10%
Librarian 4 8%
Professor 4 8%
Other 11 23%
Unknown 3 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 15 31%
Psychology 12 25%
Neuroscience 5 10%
Social Sciences 5 10%
Arts and Humanities 3 6%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 5 10%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 76. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 May 2021.
All research outputs
#364,485
of 18,738,748 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#4,283
of 100,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,797
of 259,306 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#108
of 2,691 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 18,738,748 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 100,502 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 259,306 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2,691 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.